L.A. Kings vs. Detroit Red Wings Open Forum

He didn’t like what he saw from the Russians. Both have come off games below their standards but really? You sit a play making center and one of our better offensive weapons at the blue line? It’s a good thing we’re playing the no talent Columbus Blue Jackets for a second straight game because if this game was against a talented team like the Detroit Red Wings, you could call John Stevens’ line up adjustments downright obtuse and you wouldn’t be too far off…sarcasm/off.

WWDSD – What Would Darryl Sutter Do? We’ll find out against the Ducks on Tuesday.

With a line up of no talent goons, it’s obvious why Stevens would choose Kevin Westgarth over Loktionov…damn that sarcasm button. It turned on by itself.

Who else is playing tonight? Why Trent Hunter of course! Yeah! Watch the third line of Richardson, Lewis and Hunter carefully tonight. Hunter has magical powers of making anyone with whom he plays rise up and play to new levels! Ok, clearly the sarcasm button is broken…

Seriously, what is Hunter going to do? Wave goodbye as the Red Wings’ forwards blow by him? “Hit them with your purse, Trent!”

Wow…does this team miss Richards, no heart, no confidece without him and his leadership. Sad that in 2 weeks, nobody, none of the offical, lettered leaders has grown a pair…disgraceful.
I hope Sutter was serous about that report that he’s looking at every player’s play so far, changes are needed…If the dead wood on the top 6 can’t get it done, DL will ship one or more out for an elite winger. Somebody who can finish…
Richards doesn’t get hurt Dec 1, this team isn’t 1-6, soon e be 1-7

No one is going to trade an elite winger to this team for any combination of players currently in our top 6 except for Kopitar and Richards.

I am still amazed, that after six seasons of this rebuild just how far away this team is from being a serious contender. Talk about being sold a bill of goods. All the charts, all the talk about building the right way and this is what we have to show for it.

Just for fun, what would happen if we brought the Kings from April 2006 to the future on a time machine and had them play a 7 game series with today’s team. I think today’s team would win mostly because Quick is so much better than Garon and Labarbera. But I think it would be a close series, maybe 7 games, which is truly depressing because since then Lombardi has had free reign to do as he pleased and has had seven first round picks since he took over and there is little to no improvement on the ice from that team.

Just can’t see how six seasons, three coaches, no playoff wins, currently last in goals. Amazing what a failure this thing has been.

Mike, you have to understand that those first round picks were used for getting the d structure in place, and the goaltending. Of those picks Drew Doughty and Bernier are the ones who’ve made the team. Of course Schenn was flipped for Richards (good) and TWO were flipped for Penner (Very Bad) who clearly no matter what will not be back next year.

As Bernier really doesn’t play much, and they can’t get much for him as he doesn’t really play much, we have out of those picks, Drew Doughty….. a $7M a year player who is playing like a good second pairing dman at the moment.
There was a film that came out in France years ago called “Tout ca … Pour ca”? All that…. for That?

At this point I’d call it being sold a bill of goods as well and clearly not good enough from a GM. Is it terrible? No, of course it clearly isn’t terrible…. but that sort of work is not gonna win a Stanley Cup for most any team I can think of.

I’m contemplating putting money down on a Kessel hat trick but Toronto has been in a slump from playing rough teams so I’m wondering if they’re due for an uptick now. There is also the issue of whether this game is some massive wakeup call for the Kings or if the pity party continues. Betting on Toronto also disgusts me, though, so there’s that…

I’d put money against the Kings until they can prove otherwise. If Tuesday is the Kings first game with their new coach, they are due a loss that game. Look at the 5 (I think) teams that changed coaches, only one is doing good (St. Louis). The rest are doing shitty. Teams usually don’t win when they get a new coach.

Anything can happen, but until the Kings prove me wrong, it’s a winning proposition betting against them. Obviously there are a few different ways to bet against them (or for), like money line, spread, total points, +- team points, etc.

Puck possession at its finest. How the Kings ended up a muck and grind team with all the fire power we’re capable of is maddening. I can’t even blame the players because I haven’t even seen what they could do yet if they actually started cycling down the middle like Detroit did to us. Every single goal they scored came off plays down the middle.

Am I the only one watching the game with a shot tracker on? Geez it’s been years since the Kings played that way, and DL hiring Sutter doesn’t make me feel any better about it.

I feel like we’ve got thoroghbreds being fitted for a horse and buggy race. What a waist.

That is the trap though. I do believe their playing hard. The team is just playing within the confines of an obsolete system that will not create offense, no matter how hard they work at it, or how much effort they give.

Murray’s system was good defensively, but garbage offensively. Stevens is a nice guy, but he’s Murray incarnate.

Mike H, couldnt agree more. I wish we could all just get on the same page. I honestly wish the Kings had an offensive coach just to prove to everyone that the players are the problem. Stevens coached a pretty good offense in Philadelphia, if I recall. Not a big enough sample size here though.

Honestly, Murray helped a lot of people on offense. Stoll did better scoring goals he got to the Kings. Guys like Clifford, how in the hell did he score goals lsat year? Hes not talented at all offensively. Hes a lot like Ethan Moreau. Big, strong, can get moving okay, but hands like bricks. Murray had him scoring within his system.

On paper, regardless of the coach, the Kings still have a subpar top line, and a terrible bottom six. That cant really be debated. Even if the 2nd line was truly elite and the defense was a top offensive defense corp, neither of whch is the case, the Kings would still not be a great offensive teams because three of their four offensive lines are subpar.

No simpler way to put it than that. And thats not the coach. Doesnt matter who the coach is when three of your four lines are subpar offensively.

3TeamFan,
I can try to answer that, but it will take a while to explain. If you can bare the reading. I’ve gotten pretty good at explaining it over on the insider, so I’ll attempt to explain it without making it too complicated.

There are 2 types of styles (everything in between the 2 types of styles are considered hybrids). If you disect the offensive zone into 3 sections using the faceoff dots, you get
“dot to boards”
The space between the first face off dot on either side of the goalie, to the boards, which accounts for 2 sections.

The remaining space is considered
“Dot to dot”
The area between the 2 face off dots.

Both types of teams try to get the puck to the middle for shots, but where teams focus their cycle is what makes the 2 types of teams different.

If you watch basketball you’ll see when teams get a fast break into the offensive zone, some teams just take it right down the middle with quick passing plays. Some teams have their players curl around to the outside, and stop up so that the other players can catch up to the play, and get set into position to start their offense.

That is basically the same strategies in hockey.

The 1rst stratagy is called “Puck management”. This is basically where the team with the puck cycles on the outside before bringing it to the middle or up high (low to high) and shots are taken with players crashing the net for rebounds, or screening the goalies with players crashing.

This is where TM would use the phrase “he’s got good dot to boards”, and most offensive puck movement is north/south.

This style is designed to slow the play down, and outmuscle the other team (Boston, Philly, LA, and so on) by grinding them into submission. It is easier to stay in a defensive position because if there are turnovers, they are more along the boards where the opposing team can’t use their speed as much to counter punch.

The 2nd strategy is called “Puck possession”. This is basically where teams try to use more 1 on 1 skills in open ice to beat defenders, and make plays between the dots(Detroit, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Edmonton, and so on). Players don’t rely on muscle as much as skill, and are constantly circling between the dots (that’s what I mean by cycling down the middle).

This style is high risk high reward because it depends on the individuals on the ice trying to beat the guy in front of him with skill, rather than outmuscle him along the boards. The puck movement is more east/west and is designed to make the goalies move from 1 side to the other, so that the shooter has as much open net to shoot at as possible by catching the goalie out of position.

The speed is faster paced, and turnovers are in open ice, so the pace of the game defensively can be fast as well. Possession is extremely important because turnovers can burn you if a team knows how to defend a possession team well, and can strike back with equal speed.

The Kings got burned tonight for 8 goals, and if you even watch just the highlights, all 8 goals were scored from right down the middle with quick passes, or players just skating into position with the puck. 1 thing in common was they all came from in between the dots.